EDITORIAL: BANGKOK POST- EC must tread very carefully

The termination of the People Reform Party, which was approved by the Election Commission (EC) on Monday, has led to fears that the case may set a precedent that could be exploited to allow the reallocation of certain MP seats to ruling coalition parties.

Given that the EC has already perplexed the public once with its contentious decision to award party-list MP seats to 10 small parties who did not deserve them, it is no surprise that many view this latest development with an equal sense of pessimism.

It was the party’s former leader Paiboon Nititawan, who is known as a staunch supporter of Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and the ruling Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP), who made the request for the termination. And in doing so, he has made it clear that he, as the only party-list MP of the party, wants to move to the PPRP.

Whether or not his desire can be fulfilled is still up in the air due to ambiguities in matters of law. In its short statement, the EC did not elaborate as to what would happen to Mr Paiboon’s MP status and the 45,000 or so popular votes the party received in the March general election.

Following the EC’s ruling, there have been legal disputes raised by politicians and experts on the law. Some see this as a party merger which is not allowed under the election law and they have urged the EC to discard the popular votes the party received and recalculate the allocation of party-list MPs.

Others agree that Mr Paiboon can switch to the PPRP and maintain his MP status, saying this is allowed by the constitution as it can be considered a party dissolution.

The EC should have provided a clear explanation of its rationale for approving the termination as well as advising on Mr Paiboon’s status and what will happen to the party’s votes.

Without such directives, speculation is rife about the potential implications the case may have for other parties. It is also expected that the EC may seek a ruling from the Constitutional Court later.

Ultimately, if the EC or charter court decide that Mr Paiboon can move to the PPRP and keep his MP status, party-list MPs of other small parties who are part of the coalition government may do the same.

However, a worst-case scenario floated by some Pheu Thai MPs has far wider implications. If the court rules that Mr Paiboon cannot join the PPRP and his status as an MP ends with his party, it will set a precedent should other parties be disbanded in the future, they said. And the one which is being targeted is the Future Forward Party (FFP), which has 50 party-list MPs and is facing a pending lawsuit in the Constitutional Court.

That means the FFP could risk losing its party-list MPs if it is dissolved, with that MP quota transferring to the three large coalition parties — PPRP, Bhumjaithai and Democrats — freeing the government from worry over its currently razor-thin majority.

The pessimists believe there could be covert motives lurking behind the termination of Mr Paiboon’s party. But if the speculation is true, it will undermine the rule of law and further deepen the public’s mistrust in the electoral process run by the EC.

The EC is duty-bound to issue an explanation as to how it will proceed with the termination of this party without once again compromising the rule of law.